What is corporate culture?<\/p>\n
By Rahayu Ratnaningsih<\/p>\n
This is the first of two articles on corporate culture.<\/p>\n
JAKARTA (JP): Few terms have been so frequently defined, yet
\nso widely misunderstood, as corporate culture. According to
\nJerome Want in his book Managing Radical Change, corporate
\nculture consists of the collective beliefs that people within the
\norganization have about their ability to compete in the
\nmarketplace -- and how they act on those belief systems.<\/p>\n
A company's culture is revealed through the attitudes, dreams,
\nvalues, and behavior of employees and management. For that
\nreason, corporate culture is not easily manipulated or quickly
\nredirected by memos or mission statements, but, over time, it can
\nbe developed and guided in the directions required to ensure a
\ncompany's success.<\/p>\n
This begs a string of questions: is corporate culture created?
\nWho can create corporate culture? How to develop corporate
\nculture? And what are the important elements in the development
\nor change of corporate culture? What kind of corporate culture
\ndoes a successful company have that sets it apart from other less
\nsuccessful companies?<\/p>\n
The crucial starting point in answering these questions should
\nbe in the ability of each company to identify its own corporate
\nculture. Often we hear employees retort that their company does
\nnot have a culture. Or many cannot even explain what the culture
\nof their company is. The fact is every company has a culture; the
\ndifference is whether it is great, mediocre or lousy.<\/p>\n
One thing is clear when an excellent corporate culture, i.e. a
\nperformance-driven one, exists, everybody who comes into contact
\nwith that organization can instantly see and feel it. There is a
\nstrong \"palpable but invisible\" force there somewhere that
\nmotivates and drives employees to be the best in whatever they
\nare doing. Ideally in a performance-driven corporate culture,
\noffice politics can hardly take place.<\/p>\n
Jerome Want has divided corporate cultures into a hierarchy
\nconsisting of seven major categories: predatory (punitive\/
\nalienating), frozen (gridlock\/denial), chaotic (fragmented\/
\nunfocused), political (retaliatory\/balkanized), bureaucratic
\n(procedural\/rigid\/regimented\/authoritarian), service (customer
\nfocus\/individualizing\/quality), and new age
\n(innovative\/egalitarian\/consensual\/changing).<\/p>\n
Back to the question, is or can corporate culture be created
\nand who can create it? Is corporate culture equivalent to the
\ncorporate mission statement that is pasted all over the office
\nwalls? A mission statement can easily be created, but to make it
\nmanifest in a strong culture that is deeply embedded in every
\nemployee's mind and heart is a completely different issue.<\/p>\n
Any human resources practitioner cannot deny the \"intimate
\nrelationship\" between corporate culture and leadership.
\nEmployees who cannot perceive or define their corporate culture
\nusually have a problem in one way or another with their corporate
\nleadership. Leadership is doing the right things, as opposed to
\ndoing things right which is the definition of management.<\/p>\n
Strong and effective leadership paves the pathway toward a
\nperformance-driven corporate culture. It represents fertile land
\nfor the growth of excellence. The downfall of this premise is
\nleadership is not that easy to redirect or change. A change in
\nleadership is basically a total change in the body and soul of a
\ncompany. It is equivalent to a reform movement or even revolution
\nin a country.<\/p>\n
A change in leadership more often than not means a replacement
\nof the old leader of a company with a new one. It is, obviously,
\neasier for a leader to reshape his subordinate than for a
\nsubordinate to reshape a leader.<\/p>\n
Other crucial elements, after leadership, in culture
\ndevelopment are the system and structure of the organization.
\nLeadership translates corporate vision through a supportive
\nsystem and structure. Hence, correct leadership should be
\nmanifested in effective systems and structures. If we imagine
\nthis concept as a chart, we may visualize a pyramid with
\nleadership on the peak while system and structure are the two
\nlegs.<\/p>\n
Needless to say, corporate culture is a top-down process for
\nmost companies. The tail will only be willing to head for some
\nplace, if the head is facing in that direction and making a
\ndecision to move accordingly. A failed corporate culture very
\noften becomes the source of employees' dissatisfaction and
\nsubsequently their departure.<\/p>\n
In other words, corporate culture is very much created by
\neffective, principle-centered leadership. The word \"principles\"
\nis used here instead of \"values\"; principles are lighthouses;
\nthey are a point of reference and they don't budge or waver, but
\ngive a sense of direction to others who may choose to adjust
\ntheir position using them as a compass. While values are
\nrelative and subject to frequent and immediate change, correct
\nprinciples do not change.<\/p>\n
The writer is a human resources and personal development
\nconsultant based in Jakarta.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/what-is-corporate-culture-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}